Reading the Oct. 30 article “Classic case of selective evidence, double jeopardy,” I am petrified by the flagrant and insolent manners of Japanese prosecutors.
It is evident that their prosecution was conducted by preconception, which has brought about the investigation with the selective evidence that is beneficial for them. Besides they also submitted what they called “new evidence” grudgingly and bit by bit, which has prolonged Govinda Prasad Mainali’s false imprisonment. Finally, they neither apologized to Mainali for their sloppy work, nor have stomach to review openly why they made such a mistake. It seems that they are still trying to save face, until the criticism against them would wear off.
As well as other countries, Japanese prosecutors comprise what they called “elite people”, who are likely to be perfectionist and never admit their mistake.
I believe, however, that criminal cases have become more and more complicated with the development of various technologies, so it is hard to do a perfect job for the time being. In order to meet the current penal cases, they should have more flexibility and abandon their perfectionism and excessive pride, which sometimes might hinder making a right decision.
The opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are the writer’s own and do not necessarily reflect the policies of The Japan Times.